Anyone who thinks introducing more guns into that situation (outside of maybe more cops) would be a good idea is a f*cking idiot, plain and simple. Just look what happened- the gunman shot one person, police then chased after him and a gun battle ensued, 9 civilians were hit (looks like the cops possibly hit some of them accidentally). Now, midtown Manhattan has to be one of the most densely populated areas on the planet... imagine about 100 civilians with Dirty Harry complexes pulling out their straps, each one looking for a guy with a gun.

A whole lot more than 9 civilians would've been hit by stray fire in that scenario.

I have to say, if cops who are actually trained to 'enforce the law' can sometimes screw up, I hate to think if too many civilians with guns start getting it into their heads to enact vigilante justice.

One of the gunshots hit the Empire State Building. About an hour later, the entire ESB came crashing down leaving into a pile of dust with none of the structure still standing. It was then blamed on Al Quada.

Alright ISH geniuses, its not the like the cops pointed their guns at the people and shot them, or their aim is so bad that they hit them while trying to shoot the other guy. The civilians were hit by ricochet shots or by fragments of bullets. Ones with gunshot wounds? Since they were at such close range the bullets could have actually passed through the man and hit civilians. Or they hit pavement and acted as shrapnel in a sense. In a populated area like NYC it is entirely possible that a single missed shot can break down into enough pieces to injure 9 people.

Alright ISH geniuses, its not the like the cops pointed their guns at the people and shot them, or their aim is so bad that they hit them while trying to shoot the other guy. The civilians were hit by ricochet shots or by fragments of bullets. Ones with gunshot wounds? Since they were at such close range the bullets could have actually passed through the man and hit civilians. Or they hit pavement and acted as shrapnel in a sense. In a populated area like NYC it is entirely possible that a single missed shot can break down into enough pieces to injure 9 people.

Which is exactly why opening fire in a crowded area is such a bad idea.

Alright ISH geniuses, its not the like the cops pointed their guns at the people and shot them, or their aim is so bad that they hit them while trying to shoot the other guy. The civilians were hit by ricochet shots or by fragments of bullets. Ones with gunshot wounds? Since they were at such close range the bullets could have actually passed through the man and hit civilians. Or they hit pavement and acted as shrapnel in a sense. In a populated area like NYC it is entirely possible that a single missed shot can break down into enough pieces to injure 9 people.

Doesnt matter.. it kills the whole 'everybody should be able to carry guns to protect themsleves notion'. If trained police officers still managed to hit undesired targets I can only imagine what would happen if a bunch of people all pulled out their handguns when a shooter appeared and started firing at him.

Sarcastic - In hindsight, it probably wasn't a good idea. But they were given a description of a murderer, they found him asked him to stop and he points a loaded weapon at them. What are they supposed to do? Let him shoot them?

tpols - I was talking more about the really stupid idea of police carrying non lethal force exclusively. If a shooting were to happen or some crime with a weapon and they get to the scene and its still hot, what are they supposed to do? Say, "we're sorry we can't do anything about it but we'll get ourselves shot while trying to beat him with our plastic night sticks because some people on the internet said we shouldn't have guns"?